Regarding the theme of new religious movements despite the LDS claims that it is the true restored early church of Christianity I am going to have to place it in the category of new religious movements as it is younger than 200 years old and there exists no substantial evidence that it is restored ancient Christianity.
First some fun facts about Mormonism
The Mormon Church (officially known as the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.) was founded by Joseph Smith Jr. (1805-1844) in 1830 a.d. He claimed that he established the church based on revelations he received in 1820 from two person who came from heaven. These visitors from heaven told smith that all Christian religions in existence were totally corrupt and that his mission was to restore the true church that had been established by Jesus Christ. The original church that had been established and long since become corrupt shortly after the death of the last apostle.
In order to complete this task, Joseph smith claimed that God made him an apostle and a prophet. He was to be an inspired prophet that would be able to communicate divine revelations and write sacred scripture. There are 3 of these writings that Mormons claim are part of Scripture. “The book of Mormon” “Doctrines and Covenants” and “Pearl of Great Price”. Mormons believe that all succeeding LDS presidents (prophets) after Joseph smith are also inspired prophets.
THE GREAT APOSTASY and the Book of Mormon
This doctrine is what can be called “A foundational doctrine” of Mormonism and without it the church would collapse upon itself. This claim that is made by the LDS needs to be true in order for the church to be true. As stated earlier the first message to Joseph smith was a message stating that all Christian churches were corrupt and shortly after the death of the last apostle the church became fully corrupt and was unable to teach the true gospel of Christ.
Now to get critical. Without even having to dive into the numerous problems with many of the claims of the LDS from the Book of Mormon, the contradictions of one prophet to the next, failed prophecies, lack of any historical or archaelogical evidence for the Book of Mormon. One major flaw of this doctrine always stood out to me. If according to Mormonism the “True Church” and “True Christianity” was lost after the death of the last apostle in 100 a.d and was most definitely worldwide by 200 a.d. Then how was the Catholic church able to determine correctly (200 years after the truth was completely gone from the earth) which books would be in or not be in the bible that all Christians would believe in for ages to come, including Mormons! Its inconsistent and throws up a Red flag. Most missionaries at your doorstep don’t know this information and for good reason. A lot of Adventists religions are unaware that the Catholic church is the organization responsible for the bible.
Reading Mormon apologetics fascinates me. That along with my recent experiences with the Korean group that worships a woman alive right now as God has helped me to understand more than ever the deep seeded desire of people to want to believe in something even if its not true. It is interesting the effort put forth and the miles people go through to make something not true believable. It causes me to doubt Religion as a whole sometimes. Ive read Mormon writers deal with the issue of horses in America pre Columbian era by saying that they may have been “Deer” due to the lack of evidence of them existing during the time frame of the Book of Mormon stories. Ive read Mormons turning the “Chariots” of the Book of Mormon into “Sleds”, again because of the lack of evidence and the fact that none have been found. Ive read the arguments regarding the plants and foods not found in the new world that are plenty in the book of Mormon while the foods that have existed In the “new world” are absent in the Book of Mormon stories. Ive read the theories regarding the “limited Tehauntepc model” which requires altering the understanding of the Book of Mormon in order to work.
Eventually as time passes, people grow tired of hearing endless excuses and fantastic theories that are created just so they’ll believe something for which no evidence exists (just like the Great Apostasy). If you’re willing to saddle up a “DEER” and have it pull you on your “SLED” while calling it a horse and a chariot then you are able to buy book of Mormon Zoology. If you’re willing to accept that verifiable and plentiful “New world” foods are ignored while non-existent “Old world” foods are served up then you just swallowed Book of Mormon Botany. If you are ready and willing to bend the Book of Mormon to the point of contradiction in order to fit a preconceived, “limited Tehuantepec model, then you’re ready to claim the geography of the Book of Mormon as factual Geography. If you can accept the “cities as far as the eye can see” as well as the hundreds of thousands of bodies, armor, weapons, breastplates from Book of Mormon Wars but are completely absent from any archaeological find, then you are able to accept the Book of Mormon as authentic history.
For the rest of us, it is obvious that Joseph smiths book is full of flawed information betraying its purely human origins and is a fabrication.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It seems that all religions are a matter of faith, not facts. There are many people who apply your same logic to try to disprove Christianity. "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
The Mormons actually have a high regard for the Bible. Here is a recent address by a Mormon Apostle.
Sorry, the link didn't work
http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=d7b9414ef1032110VgnVCM100000176f620a____&hideNav=1
There is a big difference between "a Matter of faith" and faith that just flat out disagrees with the facts that we can verify.
Mormons do have high respect for the bible and they do turn to the New testament and read those passages all of which have nothing to do with a “Great Apostasy” to prove such a thing happened. They use any passage that refers to anything sounding like a falling away or apostasy. They do the exact thing with the new testament as they do with the Early church fathers. They lift passages out of context and use it to promote an idea of this great apostasy that never happened. If you don’t know history or anything surrounding the context of those writings the picture will be painted by Mormon missionaries that the church was In a confused and lost state with no clear direction.
This is completely false and doesn’t take faith to prove. it’s a blatant and dishonest interpretation of texts out of their historical context. When studying and understanding hisotry Catholics can use those same scriptures as authority and show that in their “True” context they in fact agree with the “historical documentation”. Mormons cant do that. That makes all the difference. And when I say “True” context, im not talking about interpretive difference im talking about reading and understanding the text in its correct context.
Of course if a Mormon believes God revealed to them otherwise then they can just believe whatever they are taught. That leaves very little room for us to discuss the reality surrounding the situation which is that Catholics can use Scriptures and the Historical information together in harmony to prove its 2000 year old case.
Mormons can not use history and rely on a brand new never heard of before interpretation for scripture based on the claims of a man claiming that God revealed to him this new truth to make its 200 year old case. "
Just believe it if you feel its true”
This is Exactly what the Korean woman does to her cult Members that worship her as God. Any passage referring to a “Jerusalem” or “Mother Jerusalem” is her. Why? Because she’s God and she has revealed it to them. Interpretive difference? No… Absolutely Dangerous.
A Mormon claimed to me that "The difference in doctrines from the New testament to the creeds of the 300’s is evidence enough for most Mormons to reject Catholicism"
The stumper comes to any Mormon missionary at the door quickly when you fire back critical and important questions.
The differences according to who? Please show the changes. When? Where? who changed it? Who changed what? Who defended against the changes? Where are the writings? We have the writings of Heresies of that era. Surely all those Christians that died for their beliefs instead of changing them to accommodate their persecutors (like the LDS did with Polygamy) would have something to say about it in writings somewhere. You cant just brush something off like that or level an accusation like that if you have no facts to substantiate your claims. Unless of course your only recourse is “I believe God revealed it to me” then fine, who can argue against that?
I cant argue against those people that “Know” from God that the Korean woman is God either. But if that’s all there is the LDS should be upfront about it.
There is a world of difference between a "matter of faith" and just "blindly believing"
Post a Comment